Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 7/7] x86: expose CONFIG_HVM

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 13.09.18 at 18:38, <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v4: remove a blank line
> v3: longer text
> v2: use tab to indent
> 
> Haven't added a dependency on PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE because agreement is
> not yet reached.
> 
> CC more people for opinions.
> 
> Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>
> 
> I don't have an opinion here, that's why I didn't reply to previous
> threads.
> 
> Maybe
> 
>   def_bool y if !PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE
> 
> is a good compromise?

Well, that's the minimum I can live with, but I won't ack a patch without
the earlier suggested "depends on". However, not need for "if ..." here,
just using "def_bool !PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE" should be quite fine as long
as there's an always visible prompt.

Note also that ordering within the various Kconfig* files may matter
with this approach, at least when processing things sequentially (like
is happening for the "oldconfig" target, for example): The wrong
default would probably be suggested if PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE has not
been given a value yet by the time HVM is getting prompted for.

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel